ADVERTISEMENT

Anything cryptic here?

Cj's dad tweeted about the bad 3 point shooting performance in the game his son didn't play. As a parent, you don't comment on your kid's team.

CJ not playing against Illinois was telling. Either Woody knows something about CJ leaving and already making up his mind or CJ isn't putting the effort into practice. With all his dad has commented on social media, CJ might be agreeing with dad. He isn't telling his dad to shut up. I don't believe IU is a good fit for the Gunn family. I'd rather see Leal play.
Like I stated above, the age of social media can destroy a team as quickly as anything. Doesn’t even have to come from the players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: asindc and ams66
Cj's dad tweeted about the bad 3 point shooting performance in the game his son didn't play. As a parent, you don't comment on your kid's team.

CJ not playing against Illinois was telling. Either Woody knows something about CJ leaving and already making up his mind or CJ isn't putting the effort into practice. With all his dad has commented on social media, CJ might be agreeing with dad. He isn't telling his dad to shut up. I don't believe IU is a good fit for the Gunn family. I'd rather see Leal play.
What were they 0-9? Saying, "we didn't hit shots" is not too harsh, parent or otherwise. CJ's family is really positive on social media. They are not a problem.
I don't think CJ is a problem at all, based on his effort. He has shown a lot of effort, all season really.

It makes no sense to blame the sophomore guard for lack of performance when you have a scholarship sitting empty, a 6th year senior who has been anything but a leader, a senior guard who has sat the bench 4 years, and an injured guard.

Gunn and Cupps are 2 of the guys who are actually lacing up to play and I don't fault those guys at all.

The self-proclaimed one and doners? That's another story. Show me the 20ppg, 10 rebounds per game 40% 3pt shooting and 85% fts from those premadonnas. They are the ones to put the demands on.

If Eric Gordon and TJD can do it, should be no problem for Mgbako and Ware right? Anyone talking about 1st team all league or freshman of the year by those 2? I didn't think so.

Gunn isn't the problem. He's not highly productive but he's a sophomore.
 
Woodson has stated all season "we can't wait on them" (Gunn and Banks). But if I were talking with Woodson I'd tell him that we've certainly waited on Xavier Johnson all year and then some. The fans are waiting on a 3pt shooter to occupy an empty schollie- why are we waiting on that? What about that knee injury for Newton- that was last year.

Not seeing a consistent message from the coach. Looks more like he's feeling the heat and wants some nba talent to save him. Am I wrong?
 
Just for the meltdown it would cause Fran to do, I’d love to see Gunn get the nod early and knock down about 8 3s. I can only imagine what that dirty Perkins would pull to a former HS teammate. Let alone Fran’s boy.
Just seeing this comment now but I’d assume CMW would take him out for shooting and making too many 3s.

Sorry, this season has made me a downer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bucket Getter
I believe RMK would have supported him when the hordes were calling for his head due to a touch foul that escalated into much ado about nothing. You would think he went on a rampage and he didn’t even make it a solid blow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bucket Getter
Cj's dad tweeted about the bad 3 point shooting performance in the game his son didn't play. As a parent, you don't comment on your kid's team.

CJ not playing against Illinois was telling. Either Woody knows something about CJ leaving and already making up his mind or CJ isn't putting the effort into practice. With all his dad has commented on social media, CJ might be agreeing with dad. He isn't telling his dad to shut up. I don't believe IU is a good fit for the Gunn family. I'd rather see Leal play.
Or CJ made a stupid play in the prior game and the coach sat him. He played in this game so that kind of throws the Woody sitting him because he's leaving theory out the window.
 
Did he tweet last year when his son was shooting 8% from 3? CJ can shoot better, but I don't believe he's ever going to be a sharpshooter.
The highly anticipated 3 pt barrage I was hoping for fizzled into a single air ball. Found it somewhat humorous that he blew into his hand after that.
 
Or CJ made a stupid play in the prior game and the coach sat him. He played in this game so that kind of throws the Woody sitting him because he's leaving theory out the window.
he was in during the 1st half....forced a long 3 that you can get at any point in the offense, and CMW had MM at the scorers bench to check in before CJ got back down on defense. Came out next dead ball and vanished on the bench. His body language says "I don't want to be here, but I know I will be great somewhere else". He needs to get his head right...regardless of his plans next year, if XJ is down long term, there are more minutes for him to play in the backcourt out of necessity. Might as well make something out of it.
 
I believe RMK would have supported him when the hordes were calling for his head due to a touch foul that escalated into much ado about nothing. You would think he went on a rampage and he didn’t even make it a solid blow.
don't think so. RMK would recognize a stupid play that hurt your team. That was always going to be called a flagrant and was dumb. It doesn't matter that it wasn't more forceful. As I said, the announcers missed it because it was away from the action, but the moment they watched the review they said "that's gonna be a flagrant". It's a point of emphasis and they have video to watch. I think that's what IU fans were upset about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FormerRevMatt
the message
don't think so. RMK would recognize a stupid play that hurt your team. That was always going to be called a flagrant and was dumb. It doesn't matter that it wasn't more forceful. As I said, the announcers missed it because it was away from the action, but the moment they watched the review they said "that's gonna be a flagrant". It's a point of emphasis and they have video to watch. I think that's what IU fans were upset about.
He supported Isiah for real flagrants and one that got him fully ejected. Isiah getting ejected really hurt the team but RMK understood why he did it, The guy disrespected him with that head wipe BS.
 
What these kids need to realize is that a guy like Steph Curry takes approximately 500 shots everyday for the 20 something attempts he has in games. So 99.9% of the time he is just working on improving his shot.

That's what elite players do.
Didn't alford shoot like 100 free throws a day an if he missed one i think he made himself run the stairs in assembly hall? Pretty sure gunn is not doing that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bucket Getter
don't think so. RMK would recognize a stupid play that hurt your team. That was always going to be called a flagrant and was dumb. It doesn't matter that it wasn't more forceful. As I said, the announcers missed it because it was away from the action, but the moment they watched the review they said "that's gonna be a flagrant". It's a point of emphasis and they have video to watch. I think that's what IU fans were upset about.
UNC had a tough night shooting and from the line also.
 
Jack Davidson at Wabash has the ncaa all division free throw record in games-95 in a row over 14 games. Darnell Archey at Butler has the Div1 record with 85 in a row in games.

 
  • Like
Reactions: kkott
The guy disrespected baited him with that head wipe BS
FIFY. Same ol' WI head games. Players should've been warned that's what they do. Plenty of ways to respond, but elbowing him to the head isn't one. I don't doubt RMK would've complained to the refs or in the presser, but that is a clear flagrant apparently, and a point of emphasis. Just can't do it.
 
FIFY. Same ol' WI head games. Players should've been warned that's what they do. Plenty of ways to respond, but elbowing him to the head isn't one. I don't doubt RMK would've complained to the refs or in the presser, but that is a clear flagrant apparently, and a point of emphasis. Just can't do it.rmin
Except I saw it as a brush back move. If he intended to harm him there would have been damage and not a light touch followed by theatrics. It was a warning. He had no intention of harm being inflicted.
 
Except I saw it as a brush back move. If he intended to harm him there would have been damage and not a light touch followed by theatrics. It was a warning. He had no intention of harm being inflicted.
I wouldn't have said this until the X foul review last night...it now really, really, looks like B10 officials are looking for "Flagrant Opportunities" from IU...rather than just calling the game and reacting and making calls as they happen. There was zero justification for going to review that foul on X...that's as common a common foul as you'll see from anyone.

Having said that...you can't go at someone's head...in any way. Even a mild action like CJ did, you can't do it up by their head. Shove him, elbow him in the chest maybe...anything around the head and it makes the choice too easy for the refs.
 
It doesn't matter the intent. You can't make a non-bball move to the head. It's like trying to tell a police officer that you had to get something and just had to take your seatbelt off for a moment, or everyone else was driving faster: you are leaving it up to the refs at that point, and they are watching IU. Again, the moment the announcer watched the replay, he said "that's gotta be a flagrant 2". That's what the refs saw.

He could've reacted in a hundred ways, but one of them was not swing an elbow towards his head, regardless of how gently. Throw your arms back and fall backwards and scream... that's what most would've done and might've gotten a foul on him. I'd have bent over and put my head right into his and pushed him off that way, or said something to him and gotten him back later some way. You just couldn't do what he did.
 
They don't really call these based on trying to divine what the player intended. That's way too subjective. The rule is pretty specific: elbow to the head is an automatic flagrant foul. It was there on the video, no doubt about it. If they had to consider "intent" then every call would turn into a debate about that. Player is expected to control his body and not bring an elbow up into another player's head. Period.
 
They don't really call these based on trying to divine what the player intended. That's way too subjective. The rule is pretty specific: elbow to the head is an automatic flagrant foul. It was there on the video, no doubt about it. If they had to consider "intent" then every call would turn into a debate about that. Player is expected to control his body and not bring an elbow up into another player's head. Period.
They could/should have called Klesmitt for a T as well. Not sure they looked far enough back in the play though, maybe?
 
They don't really call these based on trying to divine what the player intended. That's way too subjective. The rule is pretty specific: elbow to the head is an automatic flagrant foul. It was there on the video, no doubt about it. If they had to consider "intent" then every call would turn into a debate about that. Player is expected to control his body and not bring an elbow up into another player's head. Period.
That is why I said RMK would have backed him because he would have considered everything, the head swipe, the light touch, the lack of power clearly showing the intent was not to harm, Wisconsins history of baiting, etc.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hoosier Clarion
They could/should have called Klesmitt for a T as well. Not sure they looked far enough back in the play though, maybe?
I assume they saw the same replays we all did. Yeah maybe could have/should have called one on Klesmitt for inciting or taunting or whatever,.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoosier Clarion
That is why I said RMK would have backed him because he would have considered everything, the head swipe, the light touch, the lack of power clearly showing the intent was not to harm, Wisconsins history of bating, etc.
Yeah he might have. And he would probably have excoriated him in the locker room because he took the bait that could have been expected and easily avoided. Woodson did say he didn't think it was serious enough to warrant getting thrown out of the game. Not exactly a resounding defense but he stood up for Gunn somewhat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoosier Clarion
Yeah he might have. And he would probably have excoriated him in the locker room because he took the bait that could have been expected and easily avoided. Woodson did say he didn't think it was serious enough to warrant getting thrown out of the game. Not exactly a resounding defense but he stood up for Gunn somewhat.
I agree
 
Except I saw it as a brush back move. If he intended to harm him there would have been damage and not a light touch followed by theatrics. It was a warning. He had no intention of harm being inflicted.
This is my take on the situation as well. Gunn's move was more like brushing an annoying fly away than an attempt to hit the Wisconsin player in the head. Unfortunately the Wisconsin player pulled back as Gunn brought his elbow up. What I still don't understand is how Gunn's elbow hit struck him on the side of the face. I've watched the replays the guys head was going back as CJ's elbow came leaving the only place it would have hit was the guy's lower jaw, not the side of the face. Still, by the rules, if the officials decision was that the elbow did make contact then the only call had to be a F2.
Cleary a case of baiting followed up by an academy award for selling the elbow contact. The guy even went so far as to rub his face to make it red further selling the elbow contact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CriticArisen
I suppose we all need to get used to the lame B1G official’s desperately looking for at least one flagrant every game against the Hoosiers. It has become nonsensical. And I’ve always thought the constant run to the monitors followed by hushed conversations between stripes is nothing more than a cry for attention. “Hey look at me..I’m on TV doing something important!”
 
I suppose we all need to get used to the lame B1G official’s desperately looking for at least one flagrant every game against the Hoosiers. It has become nonsensical. And I’ve always thought the constant run to the monitors followed by hushed conversations between stripes is nothing more than a cry for attention. “Hey look at me..I’m on TV doing something important!”
It's overused, I agree. Thank goodness we didn't all these reviews back in the TV Teddy days.
 
don't think so. RMK would recognize a stupid play that hurt your team. That was always going to be called a flagrant and was dumb. It doesn't matter that it wasn't more forceful. As I said, the announcers missed it because it was away from the action, but the moment they watched the review they said "that's gonna be a flagrant". It's a point of emphasis and they have video to watch. I think that's what IU fans were upset about.
That and shooting the ball 3 feet past the basket
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bucket Getter
Click on the link on the OP’s post.
Thanks.
I just read it. To me it is more of the kid not being where he wants to be in a spiritual/emotional/ way. I did not take it as geography.
Now he certainly may end up in the portal - more playing time or more NIL money somewhere else- but I did not feel the tweet said that.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT